I’m the aromantic asexual who’s thread was taken down and I don’t even know why AMA!

[IWillFindYou]

So I posted it, checked day later no questions, next thing it’s gone.
I have no idea what happened or was said.

So, let’s do this again.

[Journeyofthedragons]

Thanks for the interesting reply @OrShouldIJustLeave

[OrShouldIJustLeave]

@Journeyofthedragons

Thanks for the interesting reply *@OrShouldIJustLeave*

You're welcome.

[MumofAceDD]

Wotwhywhen your reply to me makes sense. I was just being sensitive because my post was aimed at one poster and not meaning to be exclusionary.

[OrShouldIJustLeave]

@Journeyofthedragons Not that I can speak for sexual or allosexual people but I also think the sexuality scale would be that way too, like the asexuality.

0 - feel sexual attraction but don't have sex, either because they choose not to or they can't.

1 to 5 - feel sexual attraction and don't mind sex or they have sex but don't necessarily seek it out.

6 to 10 - feel sexual attraction and seek it out sometimes or all the time (10).

Anyone on this scale can enjoying sex or not when they do have it.

Just my interpretation.

[OrShouldIJustLeave]

*enjoy, not 'enjoying'.

[slashlover]

@ArcheryAnnie

No I didn't- but the second two are all what, not why. The first helps me understand, because it addresses why.

So you don't think that I've been dismissed, told that I don't exist, told that there's something wrong with me and thought of as lesser than. You can see how often we've been dismissed in this very thread. is a why people would feel tormented?

If you don't want to help me understand, Wot, then don't. Your posts to me feel like targeted harassment, just because I cannot give you the validation you seem to want from this thread. You said you were going to ignore me - when is that going to kick in?

TBF, I don't understand your what/why comments

[ArcheryAnnie]

So you don't think thatI've been dismissed, told that I don't exist, told that there's something wrong with me and thought of as lesser than. You can see how often we've been dismissed in this very thread.is a why people would feel tormented?

No, I get that. What I was trying to understand is where that comes from. There isn't structural oppression of asexual people, and in my life experience - which includes what other people on this thread might describe as my own demisexuality, plus knowing other people who throughout their lives have never had or wanted relationships - I haven't experienced other people seeing it as anything other than just how someone is. But my life experience is clearly not universal, and - because there isn't structural oppression, and indeed in some circumstances there is structural and societal approval for people who never have relationships - I was trying trying to find out what the hell is going on, why people were being tormented, told (and felt) they were freaks, etc. There seems a real disconnect here, and that's what I have been trying to understand.

[slashlover]

How about when the GP dismissed my asexuality? How about there are forms I cannot complete as they do not accommodate my sexuality? How about my sexuality not being in the equality act? How about many dating apps not having it as an option? How about asexuality being treated as a joke in media? (there's an episode of house which is notorious)

There may not be extreme structural oppression of asexual people but it's all of these little things which say "you don't matter" or "you don't exist."

indeed in some circumstances there is structural and societal approval for people who never have relationships

There are asexual people who have relationships. There is disapproval for people who state that they are not attracted to anyone. Here are some scholarly articles about prejudice

www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/without-prejudice/201209/prejudice-against-group-x-asexuals

Relative to heterosexuals, and even relative to homosexuals and bisexuals, heterosexuals: (a) expressed more negative attitudes toward asexuals (i.e., prejudice); (b) desired less contact with asexuals; and (c) were less willing to rent an apartment to (or hire) an asexual applicant (i.e., discrimination). Moreover, of all the sexual minority groups studied, asexuals were the most dehumanized (i.e., represented as “less human”). Intriguingly, heterosexuals dehumanized asexuals in two ways. Given their lack of sexual interest, widely considered a universal interest, it might not surprise you to learn that asexuals were characterized as “machine-like” (i.e., mechanistically dehumanized). But, oddly enough, asexuals were also seen as “animal-like” (i.e., animalistically dehumanized). Yes, asexuals were seen as relatively cold and emotionless and unrestrained, impulsive, and less sophisticated.

journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1368430212442419

[ArcheryAnnie]

This is what I'm trying to understand - in what circumstances would it ever come up with a GP?

[Gingembre]

My DH is asexual. He is not sexually attracted to anybody (me included - I found out too late) and doesn't really enjoy sex (didn't tell me that when it mattered, he insisted he did, he was just "shy"). He's not traumatised but he does have autism (also not diagnosed until after wed gad kids..).

If "asexual" people can have high sex drives, what is it called when people don't have any sexual attraction OR libido (and they're not medically ill)? It would appear to me that asexuality that includes high libidos should - at best - be "demi-asexuality".

I'm fed up of hearing that asexuality doesn't exist, and I see that almost every tine it's brought up, but I'm also a bit fed up of hearing about asexual people who have high libidos.

[Dinoroaraus]

@GemmaRuby

I read the title as aromatic, I was very intrigued! Thought you might have a special interest in smells. Am less interested now, sorry.

Me too!

[slashlover]

@ArcheryAnnie

This is what I'm trying to understand - in what circumstances would it ever come up with a GP?

JSYK, your constant cries of "I don't understand" come across as "I don't believe you"

I was having referred to the gyno for an ovarian cyst, was asked about my sexual health history - told her I was a virgin so there's nothing there. Obviously it was added to my medical records at some point. Then had blood test for CA-125 with nurse and phone call with GP where I was again asked about sexual history, again said I was a virgin and that I was actually asexual. Was dismissed and almost lectured that telling the truth in my medical records was important.

[OrShouldIJustLeave]

@Gingembre

My DH is asexual. He is not sexually attracted to anybody (me included - I found out too late) and doesn't really enjoy sex (didn't tell me that when it mattered, he insisted he did, he was just "shy"). He's not traumatised but he does have autism (also not diagnosed until after wed gad kids..).

If "asexual" people can have high sex drives, what is it called when people don't have any sexual attraction OR libido (and they're not medically ill)? It would appear to me that asexuality that includes high libidos should - at best - be "demi-asexuality".

I'm fed up of hearing that asexuality doesn't exist, and I see that almost every tine it's brought up, but I'm also a bit fed up of hearing about asexual people who have high libidos.

I'll try and interpret this how I see it.

There's sexual attraction = caused by someone and directed at someone or something. Finding someone attractive to want to have sex with them.

There's sex drive or libido = an urge or itch that needs scratching or taking care of (like the urge to wee). It isn't caused by someone or directed at someone unless you decide to find someone to have sex with and scratch the itch. You can masturbate and still scratch the itch. You can also ignore the itch. It comes and goes on its own.

An asexual person doesnt have any sexual feelings caused by someone (not sexually attracted).

A sexual/allosexual person has sexual feelings caused by someone (sexually attracted).

A greyAce or Demi-sexual person can have sexual feelings caused by someone sometimes or depending on the circumstances or the person or something else.

Any of these people can have no libido/sex drive (doesn't get any urges or itch to scratch), low to medium libido, or high libido (gets the itch/urge a lot, so needs to scratch often).

Some women have a high(er) libido during their cycle, for example.

[DemBonesDemBones]

It's just not something people are keen to know more about. It's pretty self explanatory.

[slashlover]

@Gingembre

My DH is asexual. He is not sexually attracted to anybody (me included - I found out too late) and doesn't really enjoy sex (didn't tell me that when it mattered, he insisted he did, he was just "shy"). He's not traumatised but he does have autism (also not diagnosed until after wed gad kids..).

If "asexual" people can have high sex drives, what is it called when people don't have any sexual attraction OR libido (and they're not medically ill)? It would appear to me that asexuality that includes high libidos should - at best - be "demi-asexuality".

I'm fed up of hearing that asexuality doesn't exist, and I see that almost every tine it's brought up, but I'm also a bit fed up of hearing about asexual people who have high libidos.

Libido and orientation are different things, just the same as someone can be heterosexual and have a high or low libido, someone can be asexual and have a high or low libido. Enjoying sex and asexuality are not mutually exclusive as some people may not be sexually attracted to their partner but may enjoy the act of sex.

I'm asexual and aromantic and have no libido.

You have every right to want a sex life and for some people this would be a deal breaker and cause to walk away. Your DH is a dick for lying to you BTW.

[ArcheryAnnie]

JSYK, your constant cries of "I don't understand" come across as "I don't believe you"

That's your issue, not mine.

[slashlover]

@ArcheryAnnie

JSYK, your constant cries of "I don't understand" come across as "I don't believe you"

That's your issue, not mine.

No. It's yours.

You - I don't understand
PPs - Explain personal reasons
You - I don't understand
PPs - Provide links and explain more
You - I don't understand, explain it to me more.

Anyway, I've explained as much as I can so I'm politely disengaging.

[ArcheryAnnie]

Except that's not true, is it? I've explained myself as much as I can, given much more of my own history that I expected to (which has been completely disregarded) , and have been trying to be clear about what I understand and what I don't. And in return I have been wildly misrepresented.

So yeah, your issue, not mine.

[slashlover]

I'm afraid I can't help you and I fear that nobody will as several other PPs apparently can't understand what it is you want. I've linked to several websites, scientific papers and a youtube playlist, hopefully one or more of these will be able to help.

[Wotwhywhen]

You've not explained yourself at all.

You blustered in with genuine questions. Made accusations. Ignored information and just keep coming back to stir

You're posting from a biased position and expecting others to reply in good faith.
They have done.

When someone says they don't want to respond too you any more, you respond to them very quickly to bait them.

You say you want to know why.
It's been explained to you.
You're choosing to ignore it, pretend to not understand it and then continue to ask why.

[SequinsandStiIettos]

They touched upon this in Everything's gonna be okay - Drea and Mathilde ended up together - best friends and married but Drea was asexual.
Mathilde was unsure of her sexuality but knew she wanted to be with Drea (M was on the spectrum). Their solution - to be together but no sex and Mathilde could have casual sex with men.

Courtly love used to be platonic but was, of course, romantic.
As to what romantic is or should be is another thread.

What I do hope, OP, is for you to meet a like-minded person to share your life with. We all deserve companionship and to be accepted and loved for who we are. Good luck

[slashlover]

I've just had a nosey around PPs posting history and apparently we've discussed this before, almost exactly 3 years ago.

I wrote.

Asexual people can enjoy sex, asexuality means a lack of sexual attraction not the inability to have sex.

PP replied with I think anyone who enjoys sex, and pursues sexual relationships, is being utterly ridiculous if they call themselves "asexual".

PPs posting history also includes

You'd be amazed (or possibly not) at the number of people on tumblr who claim to be asexual but who also claim to have, and enjoy, an active sex life.

Also "queer" now usually means, for women "I'm straight but it's embarrassing to admit being so normal when I'm actually very edgy and cool and alternative", and for men "I'm straight but want to claim I'm oppressed in some nebulous way which you can't disprove because I'll just shout BI/PAN ERASURE".

and from 2015

hijk by "appropriative pomo bullshit" I was expressing my dissatisfaction at the idea that there is any such thing as "discrimination against demisexuals and aromantics" or that it could be compared to discrimination against gays and lesbians. There isn't and it can't.

In my early posts I had already said that sex ed shouldn't assume that everyone will have or want a partner, but again, you cannot claim that asexuality is in any way comparable to being gay or lesbian in terms of discrimination.

I'm sorry OP, but if you've not been able understand in 6 years of asking/research then this thread probably isn't going to help much.

[WormYourHonour]

@slashlover

Sorry, I don't understand, who posted those?
The OP or Annie?

[slashlover]

Annie.

[slashlover]

Didn't realise I'd switched between PP and OP.